IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 February 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150015672 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___x____ ___x____ ___x____ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 February 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150015672 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _____________x____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 February 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150015672 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his uncharacterized discharge. 2. The applicant states he was advised by several veteran organizations that he may qualify for an upgrade of his discharge. He left the Army due to his 17-year-old wife's psychological health. Since then, his now ex-wife has been diagnosed with severe manic depression and schizophrenia. He has since become a nurse to understand these types of diseases and wishes to work in the Department of Veterans Affairs in Long Beach, CA. 3. The applicant provides no additional evidence. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 19 November 1986. He completed basic training and on 13 February 1987 he was assigned for advanced individual training (AIT) to E Company, 366th Signal Battalion, Fort Gordon, GA. 3. In a letter to the applicant's commander, dated 25 March 1987, the brigade chaplain stated: a. He had counseled the applicant and his spouse and the applicant requested to be released from active duty. In the counseling session, his spouse exhibited very juvenile behavior, threatened divorce, and admitted to attempting suicide due to the applicant's enlistment. Both the applicant and his spouse were very depressed. b. It was his belief that the applicant would become further depressed due to family problems. This would cause problems in his military mission if his spouse did leave him; he was certain the applicant would go absent without leave (AWOL). In the interest of the Army, he was recommending the applicant be discharged from military service as soon as possible. 4. On a DA Form 4856 (General Counseling Form), dated 14 April 1987, the applicant's first sergeant (1SG) stated the applicant came to his office that day and requested to be released from active duty. The 1SG counseled him that: a. Because of his inability or failure to adapt due to a personality disorder caused by family pressure, it was his belief that he could not make a career of the Army. He had spoken to his platoon sergeant and the instructors at the school and his family problems caused him to make poor grades and receive an unsatisfactory performance in academic evaluation. b. He was going to recommend to the commander that the applicant be discharged from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 11 (Trainee Discharge Program). 5. On 15 April 1987, the applicant was notified by his immediate commander that separation action was being initiated against him under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 11. The commander stated the specific reason for the proposed action was his inability to adapt to military life. The final decision was with the separation authority. If approved, he would receive an entry level separation with uncharacterized service. The commander also advised him of the procedures and rights available to him. 6. On 15 April 1987, he acknowledged notification of the proposed separation action. He declined to consult with legal counsel, elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf, and waived his right to a separation physical. 7. On 16 April 1987, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge action and stated his character of service would be uncharacterized. On 21 April 1987, he was discharged accordingly. 8. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued shows he was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 11-3a, by reason of entry level status performance and conduct with an entry level status (i.e., uncharacterized) character of service. He completed 5 months and 3 days (153 days) of creditable active service. REFERENCE: AR 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 3 states a separation will be described as entry level with uncharacterized service if the Soldier has less than 180 days of continuous active duty service at the time separation action was initiated. Paragraph 11-3a than in effect provided for the separation of personnel due to unsatisfactory performance, conduct, or both, as evidenced by inability while in an entry level status. DISCUSSION: 1. The evidence of record shows the applicant's separation action was initiated due to his inability to adapt to military life, primarily due to issues with his spouse. As he was separated on 21 April 1987, prior to completing 180 days of active service, he was still in an entry-level status at that time. He correctly received an entry level status (uncharacterized) character of service. 2. An entry-level status discharge is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier's military service. It merely means the Soldier has not served on active duty long enough for his or her character of service to be rated. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150015672 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150015672 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2